Advertisement

Patient preference for therapies in hypertension: a cross-sectional survey of German patients

  • Roland E. SchmiederEmail author
  • Karin Högerl
  • Susanne Jung
  • Peter Bramlage
  • Roland Veelken
  • Christian Ott
Original Paper

Abstract

Background

Hypertension is poorly controlled in numerous patients despite effective medication being available. Catheter-based renal denervation (RDN) has emerged as an alternative treatment option. We aimed to assess how likely patients with elevated blood pressure (BP) are to accept RDN as treatment option.

Methods

A questionnaire-based cross-sectional survey was performed in patients with elevated BP in Germany. Data on patient demographics, clinical characteristics and treatment preferences were collected, anonymized and analyzed.

Results

One thousand and eleven patients completed the survey. Mean age was 66 years (55% male). If not already on medication (n = 172), 38.2% of patients would prefer RDN. Of those already on drug therapy (n = 839), 28.2% would opt for RDN. Patients who were pro-RDN were younger (p < 0.0001) and more often male (p < 0.0001). Nineteen percent would choose RDN if it lowered systolic BP by at least 20 mmHg, more than 40% if they did not have to take any more pills thereafter, and 30% if it would lower BP by at least 10 mmHg. Experiences of side effects and drug adherence were identified as determinants of patient preference. Physicians were the main source of information regarding medical problems (95.5%) and influence patients’ decision regarding therapies (98%).

Conclusions

This survey found that a significant proportion of patients would choose catheter-based RDN over lifelong pharmacotherapy. These patients were younger and more likely to be male but their expectation of the extent of BP decrease with RDN was high. Physicians are key mediators for treatment selection. They need to incorporate patient preferences into shared decision making.

Keywords

Hypertension Survey Renal denervation Patient choice Preference 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This survey was supported by an unrestricted grant by Medtronic, Inc., Minneapolis, USA (Grant no. A1355749.001.1). We gratefully acknowledge the expert assistance of Ingrid Fleischmann and Kristina Striepe.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

RES received Speaker fees, Consultancy and Advisory Board fees from Ablative Solutions, Medtronic, Recor and ROX Medical. Research grant to the institution has been given to RES by Ablative Solutions, Medtronic, Recor and ROX Medical. RV received a research grant to the institution from Medtronic. All the other authors have no competing financial interests to declare.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was obtained (University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Germany).

References

  1. 1.
    Forouzanfar MH, Liu P, Roth GA, Ng M, Biryukov S, Marczak L, Alexander L, Estep K, Hassen Abate K, Akinyemiju TF, Ali R, Alvis-Guzman N, Azzopardi P, Banerjee A, Barnighausen T, Basu A, Bekele T, Bennett DA, Biadgilign S, Catala-Lopez F, Feigin VL, Fernandes JC, Fischer F, Gebru AA, Gona P, Gupta R, Hankey GJ, Jonas JB, Judd SE, Khang YH, Khosravi A, Kim YJ, Kimokoti RW, Kokubo Y, Kolte D, Lopez A, Lotufo PA, Malekzadeh R, Melaku YA, Mensah GA, Misganaw A, Mokdad AH, Moran AE, Nawaz H, Neal B, Ngalesoni FN, Ohkubo T, Pourmalek F, Rafay A, Rai RK, Rojas-Rueda D, Sampson UK, Santos IS, Sawhney M, Schutte AE, Sepanlou SG, Shifa GT, Shiue I, Tedla BA, Thrift AG, Tonelli M, Truelsen T, Tsilimparis N, Ukwaja KN, Uthman OA, Vasankari T, Venketasubramanian N, Vlassov VV, Vos T, Westerman R, Yan LL, Yano Y, Yonemoto N, Zaki ME, Murray CJ (2017) Global burden of hypertension and systolic blood pressure of at least 110 to 115 mm Hg, 1990–2015. JAMA 317:165–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Collaborators, GBDRF (2017) Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 84 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet 390:1345–1422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ettehad D, Emdin CA, Kiran A, Anderson SG, Callender T, Emberson J, Chalmers J, Rodgers A, Rahimi K (2016) Blood pressure lowering for prevention of cardiovascular disease and death: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 387:957–967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Williams B, Mancia G, Spiering W, Agabiti Rosei E, Azizi M, Burnier M, Clement DL, Coca A, de Simone G, Dominiczak A, Kahan T, Mahfoud F, Redon J, Ruilope L, Zanchetti A, Kerins M, Kjeldsen SE, Kreutz R, Laurent S, Lip GYH, McManus R, Narkiewicz K, Ruschitzka F, Schmieder RE, Shlyakhto E, Tsioufis C, Aboyans V, Desormais I, Authors/Task Force, M (2018) ESC/ESH guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: the Task Force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Hypertension: The Task Force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Hypertension. J Hypertens 2018(36):1953–2041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mahfoud F, Schmieder RE, Azizi M, Pathak A, Sievert H, Tsioufis C, Zeller T, Bertog S, Blankestijn PJ, Bohm M, Burnier M, Chatellier G, Durand Zaleski I, Ewen S, Grassi G, Joner M, Kjeldsen SE, Lobo MD, Lotan C, Luscher TF, Parati G, Rossignol P, Ruilope L, Sharif F, van Leeuwen E, Volpe M, Windecker S, Witkowski A, Wijns W (2017) Proceedings from the 2nd European Clinical Consensus Conference for device-based therapies for hypertension: state of the art and considerations for the future. Eur Heart J 38:3272–3281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Donazzan L, Mahfoud F, Ewen S, Ukena C, Cremers B, Kirsch CM, Hellwig D, Eweiwi T, Ezziddin S, Esler M, Bohm M (2016) Effects of catheter-based renal denervation on cardiac sympathetic activity and innervation in patients with resistant hypertension. Clin Res Cardiol 105:364–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tsioufis C, Ziakas A, Dimitriadis K, Davlouros P, Marketou M, Kasiakogias A, Thomopoulos C, Petroglou D, Tsiachris D, Doumas M, Skalidis E, Karvounis C, Alexopoulos D, Vardas P, Kallikazaros I, Stefanadis C, Papademetriou V, Tousoulis D (2017) Blood pressure response to catheter-based renal sympathetic denervation in severe resistant hypertension: data from the Greek Renal Denervation Registry. Clin Res Cardiol 106:322–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ott C, Kopp C, Dahlmann A, Schmid A, Linz P, Cavallaro A, Hammon M, Ditting T, Veelken R, Uder M, Titze J, Schmieder RE (2018) Impact of renal denervation on tissue Na(+) content in treatment-resistant hypertension. Clin Res Cardiol 107:42–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kulenthiran S, Ewen S, Bohm M, Mahfoud F (2017) Hypertension up to date: SPRINT to SPYRAL. Clin Res Cardiol 106:475–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Oparil S, Schmieder RE (2015) New approaches in the treatment of hypertension. Circ Res 116:1074–1095CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schlaich M, Hering D, Lambert G, Eikelis N, Philipps S, Lambert E, Sata Y, Esler M (2017) [PP.05.32] Profound sympathetic nervous system activation in patients with resistant hypertension. J Hypertens 35:e127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hoogerwaard AF, de Jong MR, Adiyaman A, Smit JJJ, Delnoy P, Heeg JE, van Hasselt B, Ramdat Misier AR, Rienstra M, van Gelder IC, Elvan A (2019) Renal sympathetic denervation induces changes in heart rate variability and is associated with a lower sympathetic tone. Clin Res Cardiol 108:22–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schmieder RE, Mahfoud F, Azizi M, Pathak A, Dimitriadis K, Kroon AA, Ott C, Scalise F, Mancia G, Tsioufis C, Members of the ESHWGoIToH (2018) European Society of Hypertension position paper on renal denervation 2018. J Hypertens 36:2042–2048CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Azizi M, Schmieder RE, Mahfoud F, Weber MA, Daemen J, Davies J, Basile J, Kirtane AJ, Wang Y, Lobo MD, Saxena M, Feyz L, Rader F, Lurz P, Sayer J, Sapoval M, Levy T, Sanghvi K, Abraham J, Sharp ASP, Fisher NDL, Bloch MJ, Reeve-Stoffer H, Coleman L, Mullin C, Mauri L, Investigators R-H (2018) Endovascular ultrasound renal denervation to treat hypertension (RADIANCE-HTN SOLO): a multicentre, international, single-blind, randomised, sham-controlled trial. Lancet 391:2335–2345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kandzari DE, Bohm M, Mahfoud F, Townsend RR, Weber MA, Pocock S, Tsioufis K, Tousoulis D, Choi JW, East C, Brar S, Cohen SA, Fahy M, Pilcher G, Kario K, Investigators, SH-OMT (2018) Effect of renal denervation on blood pressure in the presence of antihypertensive drugs: 6-month efficacy and safety results from the SPYRAL HTN-ON MED proof-of-concept randomised trial. Lancet 391:2346–2355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Townsend RR, Mahfoud F, Kandzari DE, Kario K, Pocock S, Weber MA, Ewen S, Tsioufis K, Tousoulis D, Sharp ASP, Watkinson AF, Schmieder RE, Schmid A, Choi JW, East C, Walton A, Hopper I, Cohen DL, Wilensky R, Lee DP, Ma A, Devireddy CM, Lea JP, Lurz PC, Fengler K, Davies J, Chapman N, Cohen SA, DeBruin V, Fahy M, Jones DE, Rothman M, Bohm M, investigators*, SH-OMt (2017) Catheter-based renal denervation in patients with uncontrolled hypertension in the absence of antihypertensive medications (SPYRAL HTN-OFF MED): a randomised, sham-controlled, proof-of-concept trial. Lancet 390:2160–2170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fengler K, Rommel KP, Blazek S, Von Roeder M, Besler C, Lucke C, Gutberlet M, Steeden J, Quail M, Desch S, Thiele H, Muthurangu V, Lurz P (2018) Cardiac magnetic resonance assessment of central and peripheral vascular function in patients undergoing renal sympathetic denervation as predictor for blood pressure response. Clin Res Cardiol 107:945–955CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Steinmetz M, Nelles D, Weisser-Thomas J, Schaefer C, Nickenig G, Werner N (2018) Flow-mediated dilation, nitroglycerin-mediated dilation and their ratio predict successful renal denervation in mild resistant hypertension. Clin Res Cardiol 107:611–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stoiber L, Mahfoud F, Zamani SM, Lapinskas T, Bohm M, Ewen S, Kulenthiran S, Schlaich MP, Esler MD, Hammer T, Stensaeth KH, Pieske B, Dreysse S, Fleck E, Kuhne T, Kelm M, Stawowy P, Kelle S (2018) Renal sympathetic denervation restores aortic distensibility in patients with resistant hypertension: data from a multi-center trial. Clin Res Cardiol 107:642–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hess EP, Coylewright M, Frosch DL, Shah ND (2014) Implementation of shared decision making in cardiovascular care: past, present, and future. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 7:797–803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Baker P, Shand T (2017) Men’s health: time for a new approach to policy and practice? J Glob Health. 7:010306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hutchins R, Viera AJ, Sheridan SL, Pignone MP (2015) Quantifying the utility of taking pills for cardiovascular prevention. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 8:155–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bhatt DL, Kandzari DE, O’Neill WW, D’Agostino R, Flack JM, Katzen BT, Leon MB, Liu M, Mauri L, Negoita M, Cohen SA, Oparil S, Rocha-Singh K, Townsend RR, Bakris GL, Investigators, SH (2014) A controlled trial of renal denervation for resistant hypertension. N Engl J Med. 370:1393–1401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kandzari DE, Bhatt DL, Brar S, Devireddy CM, Esler M, Fahy M, Flack JM, Katzen BT, Lea J, Lee DP, Leon MB, Ma A, Massaro J, Mauri L, Oparil S, O’Neill WW, Patel MR, Rocha-Singh K, Sobotka PA, Svetkey L, Townsend RR, Bakris GL (2015) Predictors of blood pressure response in the SYMPLICITY HTN-3 trial. Eur Heart J 36:219–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Say RE, Thomson R (2003) The importance of patient preferences in treatment decisions–challenges for doctors. BMJ 327:542–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Stacey D, Legare F, Lewis KB (2017) Patient decision aids to engage adults in treatment or screening decisions. JAMA 318:657–658CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Nephrology and HypertensionUniversity Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University, Erlangen-NurembergErlangenGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Preventive MedicineHospital Nuremberg and University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University, Erlangen-NurembergErlangenGermany
  3. 3.Institute for Pharmacology and Preventive MedicineCloppenburgGermany
  4. 4.Paracelsus Medical SchoolNurembergGermany

Personalised recommendations